All files are literate haskell.

[schell]

It seems that all files are literate haskell but do not contain much other than code and regular comments. Many editors are not lhs friendly, which makes reading and editing the code more difficult. Is there any reason in particular why these files cannot be regular haskell files?

[jdinkla]

Hi Schell, Hi Gauthier,

lhs was en vogue back in the day when i wrote my thesis and the library (1997-98). There was an emacs mode for it ;-)

And ok, if lhs is outdated and no longer supported, the files should be converted.

I will look into this next week (because this week i am on holiday).

Best regards,

Joern

---

Dipl.-Inform Jörn Dinkla
Innovative software solutions
http://www.dinkla.com http://www.dinkla.com/

On 27 Dec 2014, at 19:38, Schell Carl Scivally [email protected] wrote:

It seems that all files are literate haskell but do not contain much other than code and regular comments. Many editors are not lhs friendly, which makes reading and editing the code more difficult. Is there any reason in particular why these files cannot be regular haskell files?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/smoothdeveloper/GeoAlgLib/issues/2.

[smoothdeveloper]

Hi guys, I'm wondering if it wouldn't make sense to transfer ownership of the main GeoAlgLib repository back to @jdinkla which is original author.

I made this repository initially to track the changes I had to make to get the library to compile after ghc updates, but haven't contributed much and realizing that it took me more than a year to bring a PR and seeing updates made by @jdinkla in his repository indicates some more activity is happening.

I'll check how to transfer ownership.